Okay, you can create an "additional structure,"
but manufacturing it ("3D print") and placing it "precisely" is no easy feat!
On the other hand, achieving that detail/mesh (red) doesn't seem like much logical work for such low precision.
(Digital software + wood-plugin )
Sorry, but I'm surprised by the response.
--I'm working with "Mesh," not "Brep" (as in your response).
Just connecting the items throws an error in the definition.
And I don't understand why?.
That's why I sent the GH file.
Could you tell me anything more? Thanks for your help.
@cfeldman The V shape supports (guides) are 2d element not 3d , you can change their thickness and they can be produced using laser cutter.
If you are using the mesh simply replace the "Brep to PPS" with "Mesh to PPS" , everything else should be the same. Please note we are not able to open GH files provided by users as long as they do not explicitly permit us to do so.
changing the joints to finger joint may help the placements of the parts easier.
@cfeldman regarding the corners that you highlighted you can change the butt joint to "simple mitered" joint with orthogonal edges as shown in screen shot
Thanks !
1. Even without OpenNest, I should still have a "Name for each piece" to be able to assemble the object. (Otherwise, assembly is impossible.)
2. The same applies to the "supports" (secondary structure), as each one seems to have a different contact angle. (Also, a label or name for each piece to be able to assemble the object.)
3. Don't tell me that arranging everything in an infinite line is a good result and would be the same as working without OpenNest...?
* Finally, this is the same situation I encountered when I first asked in this forum in August 2025 ("How to continue with Biber," after that result months ago).
Could you clarify your answers?
Thanks a lot !!.
( i have OpenNest)
Well, this version seems to be working well for me now, but I still have a few questions:
1- For the scale I'm working with, labeling each of those supports (6mm, small) is impossible, due to the scale, I think.
2- Is it advisable to change the joint on the pieces then? Does a toothed or dovetail joint work well on a piece like this? (It's too cumbersome to send it to be cut only to find out later that it won't work for assembly).
Could I see in a tutorial how they solve this with OpenNest? With all the labels printed for laser cutting?
Hi,
Great to hear that the current version is working for you!
Regarding your questions:
1 — Labels on very small parts
For extremely small elements (like 6 mm supports), it’s normal that printed labels become unreadable or simply too tight to place.
We don’t have much experience producing assemblies at this micro-scale, and many users working at this size simply omit labels or mark the pieces manually after cutting.
2 — Using different joint types
Dovetail or toothed joints can work, but for very small pieces you may run into fabrication limits (burn width, tool kerf, material fragility).
From the community, the most reliable joints at that size are still simple finger joints,
Here are a few examples from users who built Biber assemblies using finger joints:
https://www.instagram.com/p/Clj5hmDstRr/?img_index=5&igsh=MWZpcmd0MGY4NHViNg%3D%3D
https://www.instagram.com/p/CQi5mPDMqp5/?igsh=aGRtcWJzY2JyY25i
These projects give a good idea of how joints behave in real fabrication.
3 — Nesting and labeling with Biber Nest
If you decide to use Biber Nest, it’s very straightforward:
-
Enable Nesting
-
Enable Labeling
-
You can choose between:
-
Part labels → printed on each item (part indices)
-
Edge labels → printed along each joint (joint indices)
-
This is how most users prepare layouts for laser cutters.
OpenNest alone does not provide this type of part/joint labeling — this functionality is added by Biber Nest.
If you want, I can prepare a small example file showing how to activate nesting + labels.
Let me know!
ParametricZoo Support
